Basher54321

Read what I put under the link. He doesn't state the specific version - you might be able to ask him if he is looking at the comments.

From someone who flew both That’s not to say that an F-14 could not win a turning fight with an F-16, but it would require a superior job by the F-14 crew and mistakes by the threat pilot. The F-16N simply enjoyed a significant maneuvering advantage over the Tomcat. https://www.yahoo.com/news/fly-f-16n-viper-topgun-163000300.html Important to note that guy flew a lighter Block 30 which is not on the earlier EM charts and there is a large difference in performance between F-16 blocks - similar to F-14A vs F-14D.

At least 2 of the photos show USS Midway carrying aircraft back to the USA after the war - these are the aircraft that VNAF pilots escaped to Thailand with.

Ahh see that figure of 88 was in the BVR Promise and Reality report from way back wasn't it. In the GWAPs table he got it from you can see the actual number expended - note that "expended" doesn't necessarily mean fired in combat at a enemy aircraft. Expended by USN AIM-7M = 14 Expended by USAF AIM-7M = 67 Expended by USMC AIM-7M = 7 All the documented engagements for the USAF F-15C in 1991 give me about: 50 actual attempts out of that 23 x claims 7 x no motor fires 4 x stated as missed 1 x hung So what about the 15 left - well some missed - but not all because majority of times 2 or 3 AIM-7s were fired at the same target and just flew into the fireball. Should hopefully give an idea of how irrelevant simple PK ratios usually are. Engagement range was usually under 10 miles.

About 28.5 x MiG-21 claims for F-15s. The MiG-29s were fairly new - out of 130 ordered only about 35 had been received from 1987 - but they only had one unit up. This could have been due to some purges and turmoil after GW1. Will know more on the RWR / MiG-29 from the Iraqi side soon. On at least 7 firing attempts at Iraqi jets the AIM-7M rocket motor didn't even fire - so the one in DCS is perhaps too good :) .

Where is that from? - are you sure that is not after a SLEP.

There was a 1521st Aggressor sqn in Soviet times - not so sure about today. https://thelexicans.wordpress.com/2013/08/12/soviet-aggressor-program/ http://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/697/

Do you mean KARI?

Some basics on here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suppression_of_Enemy_Air_Defenses https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combat_air_patrol

That site will also give you a list of some of the battle damaged A-10s that were stuck on the ramp. ;) http://www.2951clss-gulfwar.com/abdr-home.htm FYI we don't need edited word from a third rate UK news rag when the (supposed) original journalist (David Axe) supplied the actual copy from the program - which I gather you have never seen. Take note to read the first paragraph - very important https://warisboring.com/read-for-yourself-the-f-35-s-damning-dogfighting-report-719a4e66f3eb#.5myycg9s3 The press release from LM was also public - and got to say seemed to make little attempt to defend the press reports :thumbup:

Interesting link thanks As a former A-10 pilot, when Sabin was selected to join the 31st TES, he was keen to bring his CAS experience to the F-35. The new jet has been touted as an eventual replacement for legacy airframes, such as the F-16s and A-10s. This plan has spurred several head-to-head comparisons in the media, especially between the A-10 and the F-35. To Sabin, however, that match up is like comparing “apples to chainsaws.” They are two totally different things that serve totally different purposes,” he explained. “The bottom line is the A-10 does certain things very well. It is very effective as a close air support platform. The F-35 does certain things very well, and when you leverage its capabilities correctly, it can be very effective as a CAS platform. “I think the important point to note is to find that fine balance between where to use one versus where to use another. I wouldn’t feed myself with a chainsaw. Vice versa, I wouldn’t try to cut down a tree with an apple. They’re just different, and they have different capabilities.” Even though the two airframes vary in many ways, Sabin believes his new jet can be just as efficient as the A-10 he once flew. “The biggest thing … is the training of the pilot in the platform,” Sabin said. “We are going to take a lot of the lessons learned that the A-10s have in their close air support experience, apply it to our platform, continue to integrate with those guys on the spectrum of CAS operations, and build our CAS playbook, like they have done for so many years.”

Your reply was naive and ignorant Yes - I must admit I thought it was a troll attempt sorry. Stating things as a fact that XYZ are what roughly translates as "clueless morons" based on general hearsay and emotional irrelevant arguments is not a fact in any way sorry. And the rest kind of explains things - just because you did XYZ doesn't mean you understand what they are talking about does it. How many years did you spend in the Air Force understanding the issues they have to contend with to deliver that service. Ever tried talking to F-35 pilots to get their side/take on things? maybe you should when more are up because looking at things from one point of view is never the way to go! What about ex A-10 flyers now in F-35s how do they feel now? In line with the thread go to 57:30 to hear recent from McSally. [ame] [/ame]

Which conflict involved taking out mobile SAMs and S-400 types like that again? Rather naive and ignorant statement, when you grow up you might understand. Speechless - all the best with that. :thumbup:

Isn't 2022 the year the last few get retired did see a schedule.

Originally Mid Life Update - a major upgrade to the early F-16A types of some Countries including Norway/Netherlands/Belgium/Denmark. Actually see http://www.f-16.net/f-16_versions_article2.html

Don't currently have anything on whether ALQ-162 is included for those forces - Odyssey Dawn 2011 photos show them with ALQ-131s but some do seem to have modified pylons at that stage. http://www.f-16.net/g3/f-16-photos/album37/album09/674_007 http://www.f-16.net/g3/f-16-photos/album37/album09/664_001 The Netherlands might be getting the PIDs type pylons also but no particulars on whats included: http://www.janes.com/article/58996/airbus-ds-to-fit-milds-f-missile-warning-system-to-dutch-f-16s-and-nh90s Interestingly that nice 2002 NG pdf you found does actually mention Norway to receive some units.

Possibly Denmark and Norway use pylon solutions - if you check out the TERMA brochure it takes a modular approach so you can have internal ECM or expendables on 3/7 as well as the IR detectors. (Not saying they do - an indication might be lack of ECM pod in combat) [ame]http://www.terma.com/media/105019/two-pager_defense_air_pylon-based_ew_solutions.pdf[/ame] http://www.airforce-technology.com/news/news122569.html Belgium originally had a Carapace internal ECM fit in some (had a bulge under the intake) that may have changed.

Yes that is probably correct as far as the A goes - although the only thing stopping it from being on Block 10 from 1980 seems to have been politics.

Should be more of the ANG birds.

Egypt were supposed to have some of the first production AIM-7 capable F-16s (Block 32) delivered in 1986. This is a Block 40 date unknown:

You wont see brand new F-16s doing that even if they are running super computers because you can only go so far with that before hitting physical limitations. They may have had less available resource in 1978 but when they implemented the digital FLCS at block 40 it was essentially a digital version of the analogue one in the Block 1. No doubt Block 60 could have a variety of changes - it can possibly even rock itself out of a deep stall (but note it still cant prevent itself getting there!). The only way to do that high AoA stuff is to stick MATV on it. F-22 can perform the high Alpha stuff quicker then F-35 according to Jon Beesley - basically the TV gives it better control authority at very slow speeds. The exception to this might be slow speed Yaw rate - where the F-22 only has Pitch TV. In the leaked test report IIRC the pilot seemed to think it was quicker to yaw rather than use pitch in some cases.

A TV benefit on the F-22 is for reducing trim drag during supersonic manoeuvring where using conventional surfaces create more drag (even more so if F-22 loses its negative stability in this region). It provides benefits in some areas but the value it adds has been deemed not worth the added weight at least twice now.

Rudder initiated by the pilot by stepping on rudder pedals, as opposed to any rudder movement initiated by the FBW computers.

Um - not if you want some idea how many were lost to what cause. That may or may not be the case - problem is that they don't actually know for sure the causes of all the losses so the full picture will never be known. Even if the pilot survived they sometimes only knew they were hit by "something". Literally in a lot of cases getting access to the crash site at the time is the only way to tell. Not much. Perhaps suggesting a topic like F-5E operations over SEA would be a way to go.

On the F-16 no - with FBW when the pilot moves the (joy)stick, a roll command is sent to the computer to do the work. You could apparently depart it if rolling with stick and then using manual rudder under some conditions. Typically rudder was used for rolling the older jets (at higher AoA values) where adverse Yaw was an issue (like the F-4).